Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
En Banc
VACATED
________________________________________________________________
B A L E S, Justice
method that voters of the City of Tucson chose under its 1929
I.
2
affiliation. Tucson has used this system since adopting its
821.01 to provide that cities and towns “shall not hold any
stating:
3
¶5 A divided court of appeals reversed, ruling that
A.R.S. § 9-821.01 conflicts with the Tucson Charter and that the
State, 226 Ariz. 474, 476-80 ¶¶ 7-24, 250 P.3d 251, 253-57 (App.
part).
II.
A.
city of more than 3500 people to “frame a charter for its own
the laws of the state.” Id. art. 13, § 2. “The purpose of the
Tucson v. Walker, 60 Ariz. 232, 239, 135 P.2d 223, 226 (1943)
1942)).
5
¶10 Upon approval by the city’s voters and the governor,
the “charter shall become the organic law of such city and
Ariz. 1, 8-9, 164 P.2d 598, 602 (1945); see Buntman v. City of
Jan Brewer, The Arizona Blue Book 160-70 (2007-08 ed.) (listing
B.
1
The charter cities are Avondale, Bisbee, Casa Grande,
Chandler, Douglas, Flagstaff, Glendale, Goodyear, Holbrook, Mesa,
Nogales, Peoria, Phoenix, Prescott, Scottsdale, Tempe, Tucson,
Winslow, and Yuma. McClory, supra ¶ 8, at 178 & n.31.
7
also affected municipal government. Groups such as the National
elections for their city councils, and twelve currently use this
2
Nationally, more than 64 percent of municipalities use at-
large council elections in some way, while about 14 percent use
district-based elections and 21 percent use a combined system.
See National League of Cities, Cities 101: Municipal Elections
(2010), available at www.nlc.org/build-skills-
networks/resources/cities-101/municipal-elections.
9
¶16 Tucson is unique among Arizona’s charter cities in its
regions of the city, see id. § 5, but they are elected by all
C.
10
offices. Strode at 361-62, 236 P.2d at 49-50. The Court,
however, held that these statutes did not displace the Phoenix
Id. at 365, 236 P.2d at 51; see also City of Tucson v. Walker,
11
¶20 Consistent with earlier decisions, the Court in Strode
“necessarily ad hoc”).
12
charter city governments enjoy autonomy with respect to
elections.
III.
821.01 displaces the method that Tucson has used under its 1929
A.
¶25 SALC and the State first argue that the prohibition on
provides:
14
officers, not inconsistent with the provisions of this Charter,
elections”).
each from, and by the respective voters of, the ward in which he
15
resides, and shall be elected by the voters of the city at
B.
§ 9-821.01(B) and (C). The Court held in Strode that the City
Strode.
Tucson v. State, 191 Ariz. 436, 439, 957 P.2d 341, 344 (App.
governing council.
¶36 The State also contends that the federal Voting Rights
Arizona must show that, for the last ten years, neither it nor
The State also would have to show that it and “all governmental
the VRA. See Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30, 48 (1986). The
State does not claim, nor is there any evidence in the record
members for decades and two of its current council members are
Hispanic.
3
At-large elections for city councils violate § 2 of the Voting
Rights Act when they deny minority voting rights. See, e.g.,
United States v. Village of Port Chester, 704 F. Supp. 2d 411,
446 (S.D.N.Y. 2010); Benavidez v. City of Irving, 638 F. Supp. 2d
709, 732 (N.D. Tex. 2009).
19
¶39 Concerns to prevent possible violations of the VRA do
statute does not affect the many Arizona municipalities that use
the general election who did not receive the most votes in the
ward from which they were nominated. The State contends that if
22
¶45 An at-large council election by its nature allows
entire city even though they are not elected, and might not be
with the Arizona Constitution and federal law. But the local
23
autonomy preserved for charter cities by Arizona’s Constitution
CONCLUSION
_____________________________________
W. Scott Bales, Justice
CONCURRING:
_____________________________________
Rebecca White Berch, Chief Justice
_____________________________________
Andrew D. Hurwitz, Vice Chief Justice
_____________________________________
A. John Pelander, Justice
_____________________________________
Robert M. Brutinel, Justice
24